Trial reportNeurologia medico-chirurgica2026
Neurorehabilitation with Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation for Post-stroke Motor Recovery: A Three-arm Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post stroke rehabilitation-a single center community experience.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a three-arm randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy of upper-extremity motor recovery among post-stroke patients. Subacute post-stroke patients (n = 69) were randomly assigned into 3 groups: rehabilitation alone, rehabilitation with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, and rehabilitation with both repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation. For daily repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, 1,000 pulses were delivered to the hand area of the primary motor cortex in the ipsilesional hemisphere (10 trains of 10 Hz for 10 sec with a 15-sec intertrain interval). For daily repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation, 1,000 pulses was delivered to the paretic-side forearm (40 trains of 25 Hz for 1 sec with a 2-sec intertrain interval). We also randomly assigned the patients into 3 groups based on their Brunnstrom recovery stages to make the Brunnstrom recovery stage distribution the same in each group. After 4 weeks of treatment, motor recovery was evaluated based on the changes in the patient's scores on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment. Compared to the rehabilitation-alone group, the rehabilitation + repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation group demonstrated significant additional improvement on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (p < 0.05), and the rehabilitation + repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation + repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation group demonstrated the most evident Fugl-Meyer Assessment improvement (p < 0.01). No significant difference in Fugl-Meyer Assessment improvement was observed between the rehabilitation + repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation group and the rehabilitation + repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation + repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation group. These results indicate that the implementation of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation can facilitate motor recovery in subacute stroke patients, and repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation may be useful to enhance the effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. The optimization of the best repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation protocols is a future task.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.